Citations

Background This randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study investigated the efficacy of patient-controlled regional analgesia using a sciatic perineural catheter in the popliteal fossa and a portable infusion pump for outpatients having moderately painful, lower extremity orthopedic surgery. Methods Preoperatively, patients (n = 30) received a sciatic nerve block and perineural catheter in the popliteal fossa. Postoperatively, patients were discharged with both oral opioids and a portable infusion pump delivering study solution (0.2% ropivacaine or 0.9% saline) via the catheter for 3 days. Investigators and patients were blinded to random group assignment. Daily end-points included pain scores, opioid use and side effects, sleep quality, and symptoms of catheter- or local anesthetic-related complications. Results Ropivacaine (n = 15) infusion significantly reduced pain compared with saline (n = 15) infusion ( < 0.001). For example, the average pain at rest (scale: 0-10) on postoperative day 1 (median, 25th -75th percentile) was 4.0 (3.5-5.5) for the saline group, versus 0.0 (0.0-0.0) for the ropivacaine group (P < 0.001). Oral opioid use and related side effects were significantly decreased in the ropivacaine group. For example, on postoperative day 1, median tablet consumption was 8.0 (5.0-10.0) and 0.0 (0.0-0.0) for the saline and ropivacaine groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Sleep disturbance scores were more than 10-fold greater for saline administration than for ropivacaine infusion (P < 0.001). Overall satisfaction was significantly greater in the ropivacaine group. Other than two inadvertent catheter dislodgements, no catheter- or local anesthetic-related complications occurred. Conclusions After moderately painful orthopedic surgery of the lower extremity, ropivacaine infusion using a portable mechanical pump and a popliteal sciatic perineural catheter at home decreased pain, opioid use and related side effects, sleep disturbances, and improved overall satisfaction.

Background Aprotinin and tranexamic acid are routinely used to reduce bleeding in cardiac surgery. There is a large difference in agent price and perhaps in efficacy. Methods In a prospective, randomized, partially blinded study, 168 cardiac surgery patients at high risk for bleeding received either a full-dose aprotinin infusion, tranexamic acid (10-mg/kg load, 1-mg x kg(-1) x h(-1) infusion), tranexamic acid with pre-cardiopulmonary bypass autologous whole-blood collection (12.5% blood volume) and reinfusion after cardiopulmonary bypass (combined therapy), or saline infusion (placebo group). Results There were complete data in 160 patients. The aprotinin (n = 40) and combined therapy (n = 32) groups (data are median [range]) had similar reductions in blood loss in the first 4 h in the intensive care unit (225 [40-761] and 163 [25-760] ml, respectively; P = 0.014), erythrocyte transfusion requirements in the first 24 h in the intensive care unit (0 [0-3] and 0 [0-3] U, respectively; P = 0.004), and durations of time from end of cardiopulmonary bypass to discharge from the operating room (92 [57-215] and 94 [37, 186] min, respectively; P = 0.01) compared with the placebo group (n = 43). Ten patients in the combined therapy group (30.3%) required transfusion of the autologous blood during cardiopulmonary bypass for anemia. Conclusions The combination therapy of tranexamic acid and intraoperative autologous blood collection provided similar reduction in blood loss and transfusion requirements as aprotinin. Cost analyses revealed that combined therapy and tranexamic acid therapy were the least costly therapies.